All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Seeing Is Believing: Effects of Gendered Character Representation on Informational Social Influence in Computer-Mediated Communication
Unformatted Document Text:  29 Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117- 140. Flanagin, A. J., Tiyaamornwong, V., O’Connor, J., Seibold, D. R. (2002). Computer- mediated group work: The interaction of member sex and anonymity. Communication Research, 29, 66-93. Goethals, G. R., & Nelson, R. E. (1973). Similarity in the influence process: The value- belief distinction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 117-122. Hensley, V., & Duval, S. (1976). Some perceptual determinants of perceived similarity, liking, and correctness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 159-168. Herring, S. C. (1993). Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication. Electronic Journal of Communication, 3 (2). Retrieved Oct 3, 2002, from http://www.cios.org /www/ ejc/ v3n293.htm . Hewstone, M., Hantzi, A., & Johnson, L. (1991). Social categorization and person memory: The pervasiveness of race as an organizing principle. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 517-528. Hiltz, S. R., Johnson, K., & Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in group decision making: Communication processes and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13, 225-252. Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1987). Social identity and conformity: A theory of referent informational influence. In W. Doise & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Current Issues in European Social Psychology, 2 (pp. 139-182). New York: Cambridge University Press. Hogg, M. A., Turner, J. C., & Davidson, B. (1990). Polarized norms and social frames of reference: A test of the self-categorization theory of group polarization. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 77-100. Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., & Tansik, D. A. (1990). Toward a theory of automated group work: The deindividuating effects of anonymity. Small Group Research, 21, 333-348.

Authors: Lee, Eun-Ju.
first   previous   Page 29 of 34   next   last



background image
29
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-
140.
Flanagin, A. J., Tiyaamornwong, V., O’Connor, J., Seibold, D. R. (2002). Computer-
mediated group work: The interaction of member sex and anonymity. Communication Research,
29, 66-93.
Goethals, G. R., & Nelson, R. E. (1973). Similarity in the influence process: The value-
belief distinction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 117-122.
Hensley, V., & Duval, S. (1976). Some perceptual determinants of perceived similarity,
liking, and correctness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 159-168.
Herring, S. C. (1993). Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication.
Electronic Journal of Communication, 3 (2). Retrieved Oct 3, 2002, from
http://www.cios.org
/www/ ejc/ v3n293.htm
.
Hewstone, M., Hantzi, A., & Johnson, L. (1991). Social categorization and person
memory: The pervasiveness of race as an organizing principle. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 21, 517-528.
Hiltz, S. R., Johnson, K., & Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in group decision
making: Communication processes and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized
conferences. Human Communication Research, 13, 225-252.
Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1987). Social identity and conformity: A theory of referent
informational influence. In W. Doise & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Current Issues in European Social
Psychology, 2 (pp. 139-182). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hogg, M. A., Turner, J. C., & Davidson, B. (1990). Polarized norms and social frames of
reference: A test of the self-categorization theory of group polarization. Basic and Applied Social
Psychology, 11, 77-100.
Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., & Tansik, D. A. (1990). Toward a theory of automated group
work: The deindividuating effects of anonymity. Small Group Research, 21, 333-348.


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 29 of 34   next   last

©2008 All Academic, Inc.